Introduction: Tibial plafond fractures (TPF) are complex injuries often resulting in poor outcomes. Combination of articular impaction, metaphysealcomminution and soft-tissue injury results in a significant treatment challenge. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare post-operative complications and functional outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus circular external fixation (CEF) for treatment of TPF.
Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane library was undertaken. All studies published in English language comparing ORIF with CEF for treatment of TPF were included.
Results: 5 comparative studies with 239 fractures met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in rates of non-union, malunion, superficial infection, deep infection, and secondary arthrodesis between the two treatment groups. Significantly higher rate of unplanned metalwork removal (RR 5.68, 95% CI 1.13 to 28.55, p = 0.04) and lower rate of post-traumatic arthritis (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.78, p = 0.003) were found in patients that underwent ORIF. 1 study showed significantly lower functional outcomes scores with CEF (p< 0.05), whereas 3 studies found comparable functional outcomes between the two treatment groups. Overall, there was a preference in treating more severe injuries with CEF.
Conclusion: CEF and ORIF are both acceptable treatment options for surgical management of TPF, with comparable post-operative complication rates and functional outcomes. This study highlights paucity of high-quality evidence regarding the optimal fixation method for TPF.
Keywords: Circular frame; Fine-wire fixator; Functional outcomes; Intra-articular distal tibia; Orif; Pilon.
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.